How exactly has Mitt Romney managed to attract a pollingsurge in the middle of the attacks from Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry over his Bain Capital days? According to a new Rasmussen poll, it’s because Republicans appear to be ready for a downsizing artist in the White House. And Republicans don’t appear to be alone, either:

Voters are closely divided over whether Mitt Romneys business career is a plus or a minus, but most Republicans see it as a plus. Additionally, a plurality of all voters think he would do a better job than President Obama dealing with the economy.

The Republican presidential front-runner has come under increasing attack from some GOP rivals for his work at Bain Capital, a major investment firm, and 34% of Likely U.S. Voters now think Romneys track record in business is primarily a reason to vote against him. However, slightly more (39%) feel that business record is primarily a reason to vote for him, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are undecided.

As Saturdays critical South Carolina Primary approaches, it appears the criticism of Romney by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Governor Rick Perry, in particular, is not resonating with Republican voters nationally. Fifty-five percent (55%) of those voters believe Romneys record in business is primarily a reason to vote for him versus only 20% who see it as a reason to vote against him.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of all voters think Romney would do a better job than Obama managing the economy. Thirty-nine percent (39%) believe the president would do a better job, and 13% more are not sure.

That low number for Obama is a huge problem, especially since it comes in the middle of the Republican food fight. The economy will be the biggest issue of the election, and Obama can’t get to 40% on it against a mixed field in the GOP. Imagine where his numbers will be once the GOP unites behind a single candidate. On the question of which candidate would do better with the economy, a majority of independents give the edge to Romney by a wide margin, 52/30.

The internals have even worse news for Obama, especially if his team takes the Bain bait. Pushing the fact that Romney has extensive business experience is a big plus among Republicans, as Rasmussen’s summary notes, but it’s also a 15-point plus among independents (42/27). A majority of Democrats go the other way, but not as strongly as Obama would need at 19/56, with 25% unsure, especially since Republican approval would almost assuredly go through the roof if Romney wins the nomination. The older voters tend to be, the more positively it is viewed as well — and even among the youngest two demos, opposition doesn’t rise above 38%. Interestingly, the lowest income demo has a plurality favoring that experience for Romney (40/33); only the $20-40K demo opposes it. Even the government-employee demographic favors it by double digits, 38/27.

Small wonder that Mark Thiessen tells Romney that he should thank Newt Gingrich for launching this self-defeating attack:

When they meet in the green room before Monday nights debate in South Carolina, Mitt Romney should probably give Newt Gingrich a big thank you. In just a few days time, Gingrich has managed has to do something Romney has tried and failed to do for more than five years: rally conservatives behind Mitt Romney.

Voters in South Carolina appear to agree. At a candidates forum hosted by Mike Huckabee on Saturday, Gingrich was booed lustily when he tried to defend his Bain attacks. Hilton Head resident Donald Harespoke for many when he was asked by the New York Times this weekend if he is supporting Romney and replied I am now. What Newt did convinced me. A new Insider Advantage poll this weekend shows Romney gaining ground with an 11-point lead. It appears the former speakers anti-capitalist attacks have only helped, not hurt, Romneys campaign.

Why has Gingrichs ploy backfired so badly? The attacks have undermined the main message of his campaign: that he is the principled conservative in the race, while Romney is a flip-flopper who will say anything to get elected. In parroting Barack Obamas class-warfare rhetoric, Gingrich has managed to turn himself into the candidate who abandons his conservative principles to get elected  while Romney is now positioned as the principled defender of free-market capitalism. That is quite an achievement on Gingrichs part.

It certainly is, but it might be more basic than that. It could be, as Larry Kudlow suggests, that voters who want to reduce the size and inefficiencies of the federal government think experience in this area is a plus:

There’s a very troubled company out there called U.S. Government Inc. It’s teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. And it badly needs to be taken over and turned around. It probably even needs the services of a good private-equity firm, with plenty of experience and a reasonably good track record in downsizing, modernizing, shrinking staff and making substantial changes in management. Yes, layoffs will be a necessary part of the restructuring.

A quick look at the income statement of this troubled firm tells the story. Just in the past year (FY 2011), the firm spent $3.7 trillion, but took in only $2.2 trillion in sales revenues. Hence its deficit came to $1.5 trillion.

Just in the first three months of the new year (FY 2012), the firm’s troubles continued. Outlays for all purposes came in at $874 billion, but income was only $554 billion. So the shortfall was $320 billion. No hope of a self-imposed turnaround here. Indeed, both the senior management and the board of directors show no signs of making major changes to their business strategy.

Hope for future profits? That’s out of the question. The firms only chance of survival is a takeover. … So now the question is, will America Inc. ask this former turnaround CEO to prevent the bankruptcy of U.S. Government Inc.? Isn’t a Bainful turnaround exactly what America needs?

The effect of these attacks might just be that outcome. If Democrats are licking their chops now over Bain, they may find themselves doing facepalms in a few months instead.

An incredibly stupid line of attack that backfired and is probably helping Romney. Perry and Newt were stupid to have done this. It forced conservatives that otherwise don’t have a lot of love for Romney to defend him - which is exactly what Mitt needs in a GOP primary.

Look out, you will be vilified on FR for questioning this tactic. Yet the fact remains, just as I’ve said all along, this was the worst possible approach, especially when Romney presents so many other valid targets.

I don’t know that the real message has percolated enough yet to have any deciding effect. The point was never to attack capitalism, but to draw into question McRomney’s electability.

The narrative just got horribly misconstrued out of the gate by the media; though to be fair, Rick Perry running around talking about “vulture capitalism”a term Newt never usedwasn’t very helpful, in spite of being a legit complaint.

Either way, we all know that Romney’s tenure as a private equity manager of Bain Capital is going to be a Pandora’s Box in the general election, and a gift that keeps on giving for the Democrats.

The commentariat by and large misreported the issue. They painted it as an anti-capitalism issue, which it wasn’t. They have been no better than the media who got Obama elected and has protected him ever since.

Not a flop, a catastrophe. It made Mitt look like a courageous, principled man of the Right.

The stupidest line of attack ever in a Republican primary. They learned nothing from Michele Bachman’s hysterical, emotional, Democrat-style attacks on Perry that annihilated her campaign. Gingrich and Perry turned around and did the same thing in their Bain ads.

9
posted on 01/16/2012 4:06:20 PM PST
by denydenydeny
(The more a system is all about equality in theory the more it's an aristocracy in practice.)

Look out, you will be vilified on FR for questioning this tactic. Yet the fact remains, just as Ive said all along, this was the worst possible approach, especially when Romney presents so many other valid targets.

I joined you in skewering Newt on this stupidity from day one, and was attacked repeatedly. I was lectured by sycophants about how Newt wasn't attacking capitalism, just "vulture" capitalism, something none of them could explain or draw boundaries for. I always expected Newt would self-destruct- he always does. I just never thought he would be so boneheaded as to rescue Mittens in the process. All he had to do was torpedo Mittens relentlessly on abortion, RomneyCare, and gay "rights" - perfect fodder to poison Rommney with S.C. primary voters.

Look out, you will be vilified on FR for questioning this tactic. Yet the fact remains, just as Ive said all along, this was the worst possible approach, especially when Romney presents so many other valid targets.

Yup, I tried to make that argument too. Now that this line of attack appears to be backfiring (and helping Romney) exactly as it was obviously going to do, we're going to get a bunch of "well there was nothing wrong with the attack, the media just distorted it" excuses.

There is so much wrong with Mitt that finding his weaknesses and pounding him should have been easy. Instead Perry and Newt attacked in the one place that would force conservatives (that don't have much love for Romney) to defend him. This reinforced Romney's claim that he is a champion of free market capitalism and made Perry and Newt look like they were taking "occupywallstreet" type cheap shots that will never pass muster in a GOP primary.

It would be different if this were something that only Romney had done and it hadn’t been going on in the corporate world for decades.

I suspect that many of us have been laid off due to things like this over the years. The company I worked for was bought by Collins and Aikman who squeezed the value out of it and dumped the corpse. (C&A went bankrupt themselves in 07 with David Stockman at the helm)

I don’t like it and don’t think its ethical but its legal and if its so terrible that its a legitimate campaign issue, then the candidates should run on the promise of making it illegal and punishing the guilty.

14
posted on 01/16/2012 4:22:05 PM PST
by cripplecreek
(Stand with courage or shut up and do as you're told.)

Nonsense. This Bain issue didnt resonate because the conservative (Romney) commentariat decided to misrepresent Newts Tea Party argument as an attack on capitalism.
Great.
Now, wait until the Chicago gang raises the same issue. They set this up with the Occupy movement, equating it as a mirror image of the Tea Party- thus marginalizing the latter.
When the Dems raise Bain- the leftish media will show the conservative commentariat how its done. The richest most privileged candidate in presidential history, who loves to fire people, destroy jobs and families and will certainly take the food out of the mouths of babes.
The Establishment wants Romney- many on this board as well- lets see how Mr. Country Club elite GOP one world order socialist fairs against the Chicago Dem machine.

20
posted on 01/16/2012 4:39:06 PM PST
by VinL
(It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)

I suspect that many of us have been laid off due to things like this over the years.

You don't have to tell me. My first career was in banking right out of college. I went through 3 buyouts where all the bigger banks wanted was the deposit base. They promptly fired all the redundancy and overhead and many people lost jobs each time. It is what it is. In the end those smaller banks probably wouldn't have made it anyway. In fact, they were probably created with the sole intention of being bought one day and making a lot of money for the board/large shareholders.

This line of attack from Perry and Newt was just dumb. Bain may not be all puppy dogs and sunshine, but it is largely a necessary part of capitalism. Many large companies exist today which employ a lot of people because of Bain and venture capital firms like it. This whole attack put conservatives like Rush, Hannity, Levin, etc, in a position of defending capitalism itself and associating it with none other than RINO Mitt. These attacks were exactly what Romney needed in a GOP primary and the end result is probably a big net positive for Romney who is the least conservative candidate in the field. Just dumb.

Rush Limbaugh has called Gingrichs attacks on Romneys record at Bain Capital indefensible, sad, absurd, and the language of leftists like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone.

It is Limbaugh who should apologize for sabotaging Newt's campaign. It was absurd to portray criticism of one company as an attack upon the entire capitalist system. Bain Capital is fair game especially in a contest where Romney has not hesitated to go negative. Newt's message did not catch on because of its unified rejection by the MSM with MSM hack Limbaugh leading the way.

The board of directors looked at the company and saw that we were profitable but not in a huge way and compared it with a scenario of buying us out and shipping the work off to another one of their companies. The buy and close option was the more profitable option so it went to a vote among stockholders and that was all she wrote.

In fact they worked us hard for about a year while increasing the number of employees and cutting nearly everyone back to part time as a means of getting rid of employees cheaply.

28
posted on 01/16/2012 4:50:33 PM PST
by cripplecreek
(Stand with courage or shut up and do as you're told.)

Kinda like his idea of a scam of eliminating the EPA and replacing it with another federal agency that he himself has said will "incentivise" energy through things like incentives for buying flex fuel vehicles.

31
posted on 01/16/2012 4:55:49 PM PST
by cripplecreek
(Stand with courage or shut up and do as you're told.)

The point was never to attack capitalism, but to draw into question McRomneys electability.

I'm sure that was the point, but it didn't come across that way. Newt gambled big and lost. And then Perry joined in -- followed reluctantly by Santorum. The "clown car" was finally full.

Newt ended up turning Romney into a victim. His decision (aided by the big money he couldn't resist) will go down in history as one of the biggest political miscalculations ever. What a stupid, stupid thing to do.

34
posted on 01/16/2012 5:05:25 PM PST
by BfloGuy
(The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)

He was attacking unethical, ruthless and immoral behavior by Romney. Such attacks are no more an attack on capitalism than attacks on abortionists are an attack on the medical profession.

Yeah, I saw that silly quote endlessly as well. Unfortunately Newt chose to use an absurd, lie-filled pseudo-documentary worthy of Michael Moore. It was so rapidly debunked that Newt was asking its producers to make major changes within days of posting it.

Newt should have gone about it another way, but then, those who are so outraged over the Bain ad support TARP AND ROMNEYCARE (anti-capitalism) so their outrage is blatantly hypocritical. In addition, I have noticed Fox news bashing Gingrich almost every 15 mins. Fox even used the nonpartisan tax center to bash his tax plan and THEY ARE LIBERALS. People who do not bother to look this center up would swallow the hogwash Fox is dishing out but I have learned not to trust what they are feeding us right now. They are definitely trying to ensure Romney gets the win. I am surprised Gingrich is still on the radar after the Ron Paul ads, the Romney ads and Fox news calling him a cry baby, crazy, having road rage, and other unprofessional comments all day long day after day.

44
posted on 01/16/2012 5:20:02 PM PST
by sheikdetailfeather
("Kick The Communists Out Of Your Govt. And Don't Accept Their Goodies"-Yuri Bezmenov-KGB Defector)

You are right of course. The 'rat hate machine will be raring to go at Romney for stealing bread from the mouths of starving chirren. They don't need any help from Newt, they have been planning on this for a couple years. Anyone who thinks this issue won't fly come general election time, sit back and prepare to take a lesson.

The only ray of hope I see is the apparent fact that Romney's SuperPac is composed of angry piranha fish and sharks and barracudas. If they do to obama what they did to Newt, then Obama will be history.

Opinion among S.C. Republicans is not as this writer claims. The Rasmussen poll doesn’t support his conclusion. Any damage to Newt from his ad has been created by negative spin from the Romney-supporting media, not by the self-anointed heroes of capitalism on FR and elsewhere. The Newt-bashing may well win the day, but on media bias, not on principle. The media would have found a way to trash anyone threatening to defeat Romney, whether on this issue or others. Newt is a fighter, so there is always a danger that the public will sympathize with his quarry. I don’t think that we would have it any other way, however; most of us, that is.

Finally someone on here with common sense. It was the stupidest attack. To me it showed Newt or Perry either thinks like a leftist or has some people working for him to attack in this manner. OR he wanted to help Romney. I am now supporting Romney only by default. Newt is no more for me, nor anyone else. He should have attacked Romney on Romney Care, Abortion, or issues. Not this stupid leftist attack. Too late for anything else. Romney will win and due to fact that I am ABO anybody but obama I have to support him. I am sure will be attacked by all the the blind people who hate Romney more then Obama. Scary

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.